Sunday, January 02, 2011
Lou Bianchi's Motion to Compell Discovery
STATE OF ILLINOIS ))
COUNTY OF MCHENRY )
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Plaintiff, ))
vs. ) NO. 10 CF 933
))
LOUIS A. BIANCHI, )
Defendant
MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
NOW COMES, the Defendant, LOUIS A. BIANCHI, by and through his attorney, Ekl
Williams, LLC., requesting that this Honorable Court issue an order requiring that the
prosecution provide the defendant with the following information which is in their possession
and is required to be produced pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 412 (a) and (h).
1. On September 24, 2010 the Defendant appeared in court for the initial court appearance
in connection with this case. At that time he filed a Motion for Discovery (attached as
Exhibit A).
2. On October 22, 2010 an order was entered by this Honorable Court which essentially
required that the prosecution provide the Defendant with all material required pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule 412 (a) through (d).
3. On September 24, 2010 the prosecution furnished to the defense the following
documents:
(a) Documents seized from the hard drive of the computer of Dalby/Synek
(b) Grand Jury exhibits #1 through #61
(c) Grand Jury transcript of Synek
4. On November 5, 2010 the Special Prosecutor provided the following documents:
(a) Documents obtained by the Special Prosecutors pursuant to Grand Jury
subpoenas: [Foot Note 1]
= = = = =
Foot Note 1 No information was provided to assist the Defendant in determining which
subpoenas produced these documents.
= = = = =
TC 0001-0610
TC2 001-0034
CH 0001-1055
CH2 001-0101
JH 0001-0002
KR 0001-0801
KR2 001-3057
KR3 001-0562
DT 0001-0006
ZJ 0001-0006
(b) Documents recovered from the office of Karen Rhodes: KRS 0001-3548
(c) Documents recovered from the office of Joyce Synek: JSS 0001-0726
(d) Documents recovered from the computer of Amy Dalby: ADLT 001-03252
(e) Resume of Daniel Jerger: DJ 001-006
5. On November 12, 2010 the prosecution tendered to the defendant the following:
(a) Transcripts of the Grand Jury testimony of the following persons:
1. Richard Stilling - October 22, 2010
2. Nicole Owens - August 27, 2010
3. Amy Dalby - July 16, 2010
4. Kimberly Cundiff - July 2, 2010
5. Joan Hoffman - July 2, 2010
6. Dawn Barwan - July 2, 2010
7. Cynthia Huebner - July 2, 2010
8. Demetri Tsilimigras - August 20, 2010
9. Thomas Carroll - July 23, 2010 and August 20, 2010
10. Joyce Synek - July 2, 2010 and August 20, 2010
11. Robert Scigalski - May 21, 2010, August 27, 2010 and September 10,
2010
12. Daniel Jerger - May 21, 2010, July 16, 2010 and August 20, 2010
13. Karen Rhodes - July 16, 2010, August 13, 2010 and August 27, 2010
(b) Reports of oral interviews conducted of the following persons:
1. William Dennison - March 5, 2010
2. Thomas Carroll - April 21, 2010 and May 18, 2010
3. Ann Henslee - March 24, 2010
4. Joan Hoffman - June 22, 2010
5. Cynthia Huebner - June 24, 2010
6. Donald Leist - May 11, 2010
7. Mary McClellan - April 9, 2010
8. Nicole Owens - March 31, 2010
9. David Stone - March 4, 2010
10. Jamie Rein - May 10, 2010
11. Demetri Tsilimigras - May 19, 2010
12. Pamela Palmer - May 7-14 2010
(c) Documents relating to the execution of a search warrant on July 23, 2010 (bates
stamped 02914-0928).
(d) Documents relating to the criminal investigation and prosecution of Amy Dalby
(bates stamped 03590-03732 and 000001-000608)
6. The prosecution has failed to tendered to the defense any other reports of interviews with
other persons.
7. Special Prosecutor Henry Tonigan has stated in an ex parte communication with Judge
Gordon Graham dated November 18, 2009 (attached as Exhibit B) that as of that date he
and Mr. McQueen “have talked to a number of witnesses and some witness’s attorneys
the past number of weeks”. He goes on to claim that:
“....witnesses have sought to provide us information and data about additional possible
illegal acts by Mr. Bianchi regarding the misuse or theft of County funds by means of Mr.
Bianchi’s reimbursement practice through at least June of 2007. In addition, witnesses
have advised that Mr. Bianchi’s staff performed political services for Mr. Bianchi while
being paid by the County from 2006 through 2008. One witness has indicated that Mr.
Bianchi utilized County vehicles for his personal and political use”.
8. No reports or memorandum of any kind have been produced which reflect any of these
alleged witness statements. The prosecution has failed to tender a single report or
memorandum reflecting a witness statement prior to November 18, 2009.
9. Identity of the persons who allegedly made these statements are also essential for both
impeachment purposes as well as the potential existence of other exculpatory bases.
10.. The Special Prosecutors have failed to tender the handwritten, contemporaneous
memorandum made by either the Special Prosecutors or their investigators of any
witness.
11. The Special Prosecutors and their investigators took extensive handwritten notes when
interviewing potential witnesses.(see the Affidavit of Terry A. Ekl attached as Exhibit C)
12. In paragraph #3 of the Motion for Discovery filed by the Defendant is a request for the
following:
3. “The transcript of the testimony of all witnesses who testified before the Grand
Jury which returned the instant Indictment as well as all colloquy between the
Special Prosecutors and the Grand Jury”.
13. The Special Prosecutors have tendered only the Grand Jury transcripts of those witnesses
who they intend to call as witnesses in their case-in-chief.
14. The Defendant is seeking disclosure of the transcripts of all witnesses as well as the
colloquy under Supreme Court Rule 412 (h). The testimony of other witnesses who
testified before the Grand Jury may lead the defense to additional exculpatory evidence.
15. In reviewing the transcripts produced to date in discovery there exists no evidence to
support many of the charges returned in the instant indictment. Although prosecutors are
not obligated to inform the Grand Jury of exculpatory evidence they may not mislead the
grand jurors on the law. Production of the collequy is necessary to determine whether
these Special Prosecutors mislead or misinformed the Grand Jury as to the law.
Wherefore, the defendant respectfully prays that this Honorable Court order the
prosecution to immediately turn the aforesaid material over to the defendant.
Respectfully submitted by,
Terry A. Ekl
EKL WILLIAMS, LLC
Attorneys for Defendant
Terry A. Ekl
EKL WILLIAMS, LLC.
901 Warrenville Rd.
Suite 175
Lisle, Illinois 60532
(630) 654-0045
ARDC# 00727105
COUNTY OF MCHENRY )
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
MCHENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS
MCHENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Plaintiff, ))
vs. ) NO. 10 CF 933
))
LOUIS A. BIANCHI, )
Defendant
MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
NOW COMES, the Defendant, LOUIS A. BIANCHI, by and through his attorney, Ekl
Williams, LLC., requesting that this Honorable Court issue an order requiring that the
prosecution provide the defendant with the following information which is in their possession
and is required to be produced pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 412 (a) and (h).
1. On September 24, 2010 the Defendant appeared in court for the initial court appearance
in connection with this case. At that time he filed a Motion for Discovery (attached as
Exhibit A).
2. On October 22, 2010 an order was entered by this Honorable Court which essentially
required that the prosecution provide the Defendant with all material required pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule 412 (a) through (d).
3. On September 24, 2010 the prosecution furnished to the defense the following
documents:
(a) Documents seized from the hard drive of the computer of Dalby/Synek
(b) Grand Jury exhibits #1 through #61
(c) Grand Jury transcript of Synek
4. On November 5, 2010 the Special Prosecutor provided the following documents:
(a) Documents obtained by the Special Prosecutors pursuant to Grand Jury
subpoenas: [Foot Note 1]
= = = = =
Foot Note 1 No information was provided to assist the Defendant in determining which
subpoenas produced these documents.
= = = = =
TC 0001-0610
TC2 001-0034
CH 0001-1055
CH2 001-0101
JH 0001-0002
KR 0001-0801
KR2 001-3057
KR3 001-0562
DT 0001-0006
ZJ 0001-0006
(b) Documents recovered from the office of Karen Rhodes: KRS 0001-3548
(c) Documents recovered from the office of Joyce Synek: JSS 0001-0726
(d) Documents recovered from the computer of Amy Dalby: ADLT 001-03252
(e) Resume of Daniel Jerger: DJ 001-006
5. On November 12, 2010 the prosecution tendered to the defendant the following:
(a) Transcripts of the Grand Jury testimony of the following persons:
1. Richard Stilling - October 22, 2010
2. Nicole Owens - August 27, 2010
3. Amy Dalby - July 16, 2010
4. Kimberly Cundiff - July 2, 2010
5. Joan Hoffman - July 2, 2010
6. Dawn Barwan - July 2, 2010
7. Cynthia Huebner - July 2, 2010
8. Demetri Tsilimigras - August 20, 2010
9. Thomas Carroll - July 23, 2010 and August 20, 2010
10. Joyce Synek - July 2, 2010 and August 20, 2010
11. Robert Scigalski - May 21, 2010, August 27, 2010 and September 10,
2010
12. Daniel Jerger - May 21, 2010, July 16, 2010 and August 20, 2010
13. Karen Rhodes - July 16, 2010, August 13, 2010 and August 27, 2010
(b) Reports of oral interviews conducted of the following persons:
1. William Dennison - March 5, 2010
2. Thomas Carroll - April 21, 2010 and May 18, 2010
3. Ann Henslee - March 24, 2010
4. Joan Hoffman - June 22, 2010
5. Cynthia Huebner - June 24, 2010
6. Donald Leist - May 11, 2010
7. Mary McClellan - April 9, 2010
8. Nicole Owens - March 31, 2010
9. David Stone - March 4, 2010
10. Jamie Rein - May 10, 2010
11. Demetri Tsilimigras - May 19, 2010
12. Pamela Palmer - May 7-14 2010
(c) Documents relating to the execution of a search warrant on July 23, 2010 (bates
stamped 02914-0928).
(d) Documents relating to the criminal investigation and prosecution of Amy Dalby
(bates stamped 03590-03732 and 000001-000608)
6. The prosecution has failed to tendered to the defense any other reports of interviews with
other persons.
7. Special Prosecutor Henry Tonigan has stated in an ex parte communication with Judge
Gordon Graham dated November 18, 2009 (attached as Exhibit B) that as of that date he
and Mr. McQueen “have talked to a number of witnesses and some witness’s attorneys
the past number of weeks”. He goes on to claim that:
“....witnesses have sought to provide us information and data about additional possible
illegal acts by Mr. Bianchi regarding the misuse or theft of County funds by means of Mr.
Bianchi’s reimbursement practice through at least June of 2007. In addition, witnesses
have advised that Mr. Bianchi’s staff performed political services for Mr. Bianchi while
being paid by the County from 2006 through 2008. One witness has indicated that Mr.
Bianchi utilized County vehicles for his personal and political use”.
8. No reports or memorandum of any kind have been produced which reflect any of these
alleged witness statements. The prosecution has failed to tender a single report or
memorandum reflecting a witness statement prior to November 18, 2009.
9. Identity of the persons who allegedly made these statements are also essential for both
impeachment purposes as well as the potential existence of other exculpatory bases.
10.. The Special Prosecutors have failed to tender the handwritten, contemporaneous
memorandum made by either the Special Prosecutors or their investigators of any
witness.
11. The Special Prosecutors and their investigators took extensive handwritten notes when
interviewing potential witnesses.(see the Affidavit of Terry A. Ekl attached as Exhibit C)
12. In paragraph #3 of the Motion for Discovery filed by the Defendant is a request for the
following:
3. “The transcript of the testimony of all witnesses who testified before the Grand
Jury which returned the instant Indictment as well as all colloquy between the
Special Prosecutors and the Grand Jury”.
13. The Special Prosecutors have tendered only the Grand Jury transcripts of those witnesses
who they intend to call as witnesses in their case-in-chief.
14. The Defendant is seeking disclosure of the transcripts of all witnesses as well as the
colloquy under Supreme Court Rule 412 (h). The testimony of other witnesses who
testified before the Grand Jury may lead the defense to additional exculpatory evidence.
15. In reviewing the transcripts produced to date in discovery there exists no evidence to
support many of the charges returned in the instant indictment. Although prosecutors are
not obligated to inform the Grand Jury of exculpatory evidence they may not mislead the
grand jurors on the law. Production of the collequy is necessary to determine whether
these Special Prosecutors mislead or misinformed the Grand Jury as to the law.
Wherefore, the defendant respectfully prays that this Honorable Court order the
prosecution to immediately turn the aforesaid material over to the defendant.
Respectfully submitted by,
Terry A. Ekl
EKL WILLIAMS, LLC
Attorneys for Defendant
Terry A. Ekl
EKL WILLIAMS, LLC.
901 Warrenville Rd.
Suite 175
Lisle, Illinois 60532
(630) 654-0045
ARDC# 00727105
# posted by Cal Skinner : 9:49 PM
